In Sense and Sensibilia, J. L. Austin warned philosophers against the “constant obsessive repetition of the same small range of jejune ‘examples.’ ” We place in this category the case illustrating so-called false happiness that focuses on a seemingly happy woman who is unaware her husband has been cheating on her. (Interestingly, the example is never that of a seemingly happy man who is unaware his wife has been cheating on him.) We find the case not only stale but unconvincing, because while happiness may be based on a false belief, happiness, if sincerely felt, is genuine.
Here’s a true story from the world of academia that we hope enriches discussion. (The incident is explored in our book Happiness and Goodness: Philosophical Reflections on Living Well. We have masked names to preserve anonymity.) “Eve” is an assistant professor at “Euclid University.” She is happy, enjoying the campus setting, amiable colleagues, and motivated students. She is especially pleased with the head of her department, a renowned scholar who is highly complimentary about her. The head asks her to serve on important committees, represent the department in college-wide activities, and lead in planning the curriculum. She is delighted to participate in these undertakings, while she continues to relish her teaching and develop her research.
In her sixth year at Euclid, she comes up for tenure. She assumes all will go smoothly, especially because she has such strong support from the department head. She recognizes, though, that her scholarship presents a problem. She has spent so much time shouldering departmental and collegial responsibilities that she has published only a couple of articles. Yet she is confident of a positive outcome, because her efforts have greatly benefitted the department and the university.
But matters go awry. In view of her thin publication record, the department recommends against her receiving tenure. The head does not support her, writing that although her service has been useful, she has not demonstrated strong potential as a scholar. Eventually, after all appeals have been exhausted, Eve is rejected for tenure. She is furious at her departmental head, disappointed with her colleagues, and extraordinarily unhappy.
Now the question is: Was Eve ever happy at Euclid? In What is Good and Why, Richard Kraut argues that whether a person is living happily depends on whether that individual is “attaining the important things he values, or if he comes reasonably close to this high standard.” Because Eve was deceived, believing she was making progress toward attaining tenure when she wasn’t, Kraut is committed to claiming that Eve was not happy.
To suppose, however, that she was unhappy (or neither happy nor unhappy) is to misdescribe the situation. In fact, she was delighted with her appointment at Euclid. Granted, her outlook eventually changed, and her happiness disappeared, but her later unhappiness didn’t change her earlier happiness. Although what occurs in the future can affect how we view the past, future events cannot alter past attitudes.
Admittedly, her past happiness was based on misreading the situation, for she didn’t understand the trouble she faced. Had she realized, she wouldn’t have been happy and might have sought to exit from Euclid. But she hadn’t the slightest interest in leaving. Why not? Because she was happy.
Furthermore, just as her initial happiness was obvious, so was her later unhappiness. Suppose Eve had gone to the dean to complain about the tenure decision and convey how unhappy she was. Imagine the dean replying, “You’ve been happy here for so long. How could you now be unhappy? I don’t believe you’re unhappy. You’re just confused. You think you’re unhappy, but you’re not.” Deans have said foolish things, but this reply would top them all. For if Eve sincerely asserted she was unhappy, then she was.
The appropriate response to examples of supposedly false happiness is that sincere expressions of happiness are true, although they may be based on false assumptions. In such cases, the happiness is not false, but the beliefs on which it is based are false. Indeed, if happiness is based on false beliefs and the individual never finds out the truth, then the person remains happy.
In fact, whatever satisfaction you may find is invariably achieved in a setting containing incomplete or misleading information. For example, you may be happy while unaware or misled about travails of your family or friends, criticisms of you others may express only in private, lurking threats to you or your loved ones, injustices you could mitigate that may be occurring without your awareness, and physical or mental frailties that, unbeknownst to you, threaten your long-term well-being. If the pervasiveness of such conditions tempts you to conclude that all happiness is false happiness, you thereby rob the term “happiness” of its usefulness in distinguishing those who are content from those who are not.
Our conclusion is that we can be happy even while ignorant or mistaken about aspects of our situation. After all, happiness is hard enough to achieve without requiring that the happy person be fully cognizant of all conditions of life that might affect that individual’s outlook.
Steven M. Cahn
Steven M Cahn is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the City University of New York Graduate Center. Among the recent books he has authored are Teaching Philosophy: A Guide (Routledge, 2018); Inside Academia: Professors, Politics, and Policies (Rutgers, 2019); Navigating Academic Life: How the System Works (Routledge, 2021); Professors as Teachers (Wipf and Stock, 2022), and, most recently, From Student to Scholar: A Candid Guide to Becoming a Professor, Second Edition (Wipf and Stock, 2024).
Christine Vitrano
Christine Vitrano, associate professor of philosophy at Brooklyn College of The City University of New York, are the authors of Happiness and Goodness: Philosophical Reflections on Living Well (New York: Columbia University Press, 2015).
.jpg){kind=link}